Making it all about a specific weapon delivery system pretty much clouds the issue.
(Ol' Ginger Bastarda role model for the children, Mon 12 Nov 2012, 9:33,
Reply)

Yeah, i agree, but drone tends to mean sneaky sneaky so people love to be specific when it comes to them.
It makes it worse, somehow.
(Dawn Of The Bread$$$$ E-THUG 4 LIFE - THAT'S HOW I SCROLL $$$$, Mon 12 Nov 2012, 9:42,
Reply)

innocent untill proven guilty doesnt seem to apply here
or the simple fact that they are "aleged" insurgents terrorist fredom fighters nut jobs call them what you will is enough to get them killed?if you killed some over there and sdaid i suspect they are one of the above you would be sent to some shit hole prison for a long time but put a uniform on and do the same thing and its ok because you are defending your goverments right to exploit oil from other countrys and manipulte the media and people how you see fit.would the people of america stand for this if they knew the truth behind this shit not just what they are spoon fed would obamalamdingdong have got back into the white house?who knows
(fluffybunnykilleruses prunes and helium for shits and giggles, Mon 12 Nov 2012, 9:43,
Reply)

Actually if you were in a uniform and on the ground subject to the rules of engagment you'll be liable for a court marshel.
But press a button thousands of miles away and suspicion is enough.

Anyways these are insurgents battling against the forces of good.Not like those freedom fighters in Syria struggling against the forces of evil.
(CerebusTarim!, Mon 12 Nov 2012, 9:52,
Reply)

Drones get all the bad press
for several reasons, but to my mind it's primarily due to their extended loitering over a target area before they strike. They can circle around a target area for many, many hours before finally releasing their weapons. Now imagine you're in Pakistan or wherever and you see/hear a drone in the area. Imagine the sheer terror of knowing that that flying robotic death machine may choose to kill you at any point and there's nothing you can do to fight back.

Secondly, a drone is vastly inferior to a human-piloted aircraft in terms of target validation. It is restricted to seeing what its cameras and other sensors are pointed at at the time, and can only see at the resolution of its cameras. As a result is unable to effectively evaluate a target in terms of collateral damage. There is absolutely no substitute for having a human eyeball assessing the target prior to weapon firing.

Thirdly the drones relatively low-value aircraft in comparison to a fighter jet, they fire low-cost munitions and they are controlled from many thousands of miles away. There's comparitively little financial cost in their use, and there's no risk to the operator. It's war for the Playstation generation: You get shot down, no problem, just reload.*

Due to the range from which they're launched and the speed they approach, there's little to no warning of a cruise missile strike so the terror factor doesn't really count. They're (mostly) precision weapons, but they cost several million a shot. As a result they're too expensive to use except in the initial days of a war to destroy the air defences of a country, or for other high-value targets.

* As an aside, several years ago at work I once overheard a uniformed officer and a sales manager at a coffee machine, discussing the problems that the USAF were having with B2 pilots flying round-trip bombing missions over Afghanistan out of Maryland. They were having trouble connecting the fact they were fighting a war and killing people, then going home to their families at the end of the mission. It was all I cound do to avoid shouting "GOOD!" at them. War *should* have a cost, be it physical, financial or psychological. When it exacts no toll on us, then there is no reason not to fight.
(wheresthefishThis div will be replaced, Mon 12 Nov 2012, 10:06,
Reply)

Hang on...
You are saying a pilot of a plane flying at high altitude can see better than a drone at a much lower altitude?

Pretty sure that a pilot can't see as well as a drone controller
(Ol' Ginger Bastarda role model for the children, Mon 12 Nov 2012, 10:33,
Reply)

Perhaps I wasn't making my point clearly enough
I was referring to the difference in situational awareness.

It's the difference between driving a car and playing a driving game. Playing the game, you can only see what the screen shows. Even if you can steer the camera, you'll never get the full field-of-view that an eyeball gives you.
(wheresthefishThis div will be replaced, Mon 12 Nov 2012, 11:06,
Reply)